Giuseppe Giuliani1, Francesco Guerra2, Diego Coletta3,4, Antonio Giuliani5, Lucia Salvischiani2, Angela Tribuzi2, Giuseppe Caravaglios2, Alfredo Genovese2, Andrea Coratti2. 1. Department of General and Urgency Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Via Senese, 161, 58100, Grosseto, Italy. giu.giuliani86@gmail.com. 2. Department of General and Urgency Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Via Senese, 161, 58100, Grosseto, Italy. 3. Department of Surgical Sciences, Emergency Department - Emergency and Trauma Surgery Unit, Umberto I University Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 4. Department of General Surgery, Ospedali Riuniti Marche Nord, Pesaro, Italy. 5. Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences, Department of General Surgery, University of L'Aquila, San Salvatore Hospital, L'Aquila, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Minimally invasive surgery has been universally accepted as a valid option for the treatment of diverticular disease, provided specific expertise is available. Over the last decade, there has been a growing interest in the application of robotic approaches for diverticular disease. We aimed at evaluating whether robotic colectomy may offer some advantages over the laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of diverticular disease by meta-analyzing the available data from the medical literature. METHODS: The PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Web Of Sciences electronic databases were searched for literature up to December 2020. Inclusion criteria considered all comparative studies evaluating robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for diverticulitis eligible. The conversion rate to the open approach was evaluated as the primary outcome. RESULTS: The data of 4177 patients from nine studies were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics. Patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy compared to those who underwent surgery with a robotic approach had a significantly higher risk of conversion into an open procedure (12.5% vs. 7.4%, p < 0.00001) and abbreviated hospital stay (p < 0.0001) at the price of a longer operating time (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, the robotic approach offers significant advantages in terms of conversion rate and shortened hospital stay for the treatment of diverticular disease. However, because of the lack of available evidence, it is impossible to draw definitive conclusions.
PURPOSE: Minimally invasive surgery has been universally accepted as a valid option for the treatment of diverticular disease, provided specific expertise is available. Over the last decade, there has been a growing interest in the application of robotic approaches for diverticular disease. We aimed at evaluating whether robotic colectomy may offer some advantages over the laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of diverticular disease by meta-analyzing the available data from the medical literature. METHODS: The PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Web Of Sciences electronic databases were searched for literature up to December 2020. Inclusion criteria considered all comparative studies evaluating robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for diverticulitis eligible. The conversion rate to the open approach was evaluated as the primary outcome. RESULTS: The data of 4177 patients from nine studies were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics. Patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy compared to those who underwent surgery with a robotic approach had a significantly higher risk of conversion into an open procedure (12.5% vs. 7.4%, p < 0.00001) and abbreviated hospital stay (p < 0.0001) at the price of a longer operating time (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, the robotic approach offers significant advantages in terms of conversion rate and shortened hospital stay for the treatment of diverticular disease. However, because of the lack of available evidence, it is impossible to draw definitive conclusions.
Authors: Avinash Bhakta; Marcel Tafen; Owen Glotzer; Jonathan Canete; A David Chismark; Brian T Valerian; Steven C Stain; Edward C Lee Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-08-15 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Mohammed H Al-Temimi; Bindupriya Chandrasekaran; Johan Agapian; Walter R Peters; Katrina O Wells Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2019-06-23 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: J K Schultz; N Azhar; G A Binda; G Barbara; S Biondo; M A Boermeester; A Chabok; E C J Consten; S T van Dijk; A Johanssen; W Kruis; D Lambrichts; S Post; F Ris; T A Rockall; A Samuelsson; S Di Saverio; D Tartaglia; A Thorisson; D C Winter; W Bemelman; E Angenete Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2020-07-07 Impact factor: 3.788